Last week Sara Khan, who is the British government’s “adviser for social cohesion and resilience,” issued an official report detailing what she terms “freedom-restricting harassment,” that is, intimidation that makes people afraid to discuss certain topics. Praising Khan’s report, Nick Cohen writes that this harassment amounts to “a blasphemy law in the UK and the rest of the West.” This law is an unusual one:

No Parliament voted for it. No court enforces it. There is no presumption of innocence, and no possible appeal against conviction—even when the sentence is death.

Yet, writes Cohen, that makes it no less real, as the example, cited by Khan, of a teacher who showed his class pictures of Mohammad, the pope, and Jesus makes clear:

A parent of a child in the class called the teacher to say that the image of the prophet should not have been shown to pupils, before warning that “there will be repercussions.” Pictures of the teacher, his partner, his home, and car were shared on Instagram, Snapchat, and WhatsApp, alongside such exhortations as “let’s sort this out for the prophet” and “if u see him u know what to do.”

The school and the British state refused to treat the threats to the teacher as an attack on the principles of a free society. Far from defending him, the school suspended him, and said on no account was he to talk to his colleagues. Not content with that, they suspended two other teachers who had taught the same lesson. . . . The teacher contacted the police. So frightened was he by their insouciance, he and his family fled.

For more than a year, the Iran-backed Houthis have been launching drones and missiles at ships traversing the Red Sea, as well as at Israeli territory, in support of Hamas. This development has drastically curtailed shipping through the Suez Canal and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, driving up trade prices. This week, the Trump administration began an extensive bombing campaign against the Houthis in an effort to reopen that crucial waterway. Burcu Ozcelik highlights another benefit of this action:

The administration has a broader geopolitical agenda—one that includes countering China’s economic leverage, particularly Beijing’s reliance on Iranian oil. By targeting the Houthis, the United States is not only safeguarding vital shipping lanes but also exerting pressure on the Iran-China energy nexus, a key component of Beijing’s strategic posture in the region.

China was the primary destination for up to 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports in 2024, underscoring the deepening economic ties between Beijing and Tehran despite U.S. sanctions. By helping fill Iranian coffers, China aids Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in financing proxies like the Houthis. Since October of last year, notable U.S. Treasury announcements have revealed covert links between China and the Houthis.

Striking the Houthis could trigger broader repercussions—not least by disrupting the flow of Iranian oil to China. While difficult to confirm, it is conceivable and has been reported, that the Houthis may have received financial or other forms of compensation from China (such as Chinese-made military components) in exchange for allowing freedom of passage for China-affiliated vessels in the Red Sea.